A Response to Dr Swamy’s DNA Article

A lot has been written and said about the article written by Subramian Swamy in DNA. The article was described as communally insensitive and following a furore over this article, Mr Swamy was expelled from Harvard where he used to teach Economics during the summer school for his alleged extremist views. Mr Swamy repeatedly argued in his favour and urged people to read his article before getting judgemental on the basis of the headpoints they’ve read which were printed and broadcasted by media houses. Mr Swamy said that his article was based on a series of analysis and reasoning. I refrained from commenting on it since I had not read the entire article but today I got an opportunity to do so. I went through it thrice and now I have every right to express my feelings on it.

Mr Swamy’s article is based on steps needed to be taken to tackle Islamic terror. It’s not based on any sound reasoning as Mr Swamy claimed but on deep prejudices which he is holding against the Muslims. I’ll easily prove how absurd his article really was. I want to make two quick points. Firstly, this article proves how communal Mr Swamy is and how he is trying to make use of the Hindutva agenda to fulfil certain political ambitions. Mr Swamy argues in his article that all the Hindus should rise above caste and language and vote for a Hindu Party (signifying his intention of dividing the electorate communally) so that a genuine Hindu Party can come to power and turn India into a Hindu Rashtra. Secondly, this article shows how violent he is in his approach. In his article he argues that since certain Islamic militants were targeting Hindu temples and its devotees, the Hindus should raze 300 mosques built on areas which are believed and perceived by Hindus to be the ones on which temples used to exist (meaning thereby more Babri Masjid Demolition like incidents). The above two mentioned points clearly indict Mr Swamy of wanting to promote communal disharmony. Let’s analyze Mr Swamy’s whole article and provide him with a point by point rebuttal.

Mr Swamy recognizes Islamic terrorism as India’s biggest national security threat. I doubt that even though I do agree that it is a significant threat but the biggest threat posed to India’s security is by the Maoists, that is left wing extremism. This fact has even been acknowledged by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Home Minister P Chidambaram who described Maoism as India’s single largest internal security threat. Maoists have killed far more people than Islamic militants but for argument’s sake let’s assume that Islamic terrorism is a greater threat than Maoism. Mr Swamy claims that very soon the Islamic militants will take over Pakistan and America will flee Afghanistan. Then fanatic Muslims will look to assault India. Islam will rise up to settle unfinished business with Hinduism. Let’s be clear of one thing. Certain fanatic Muslim terrorist organizations’ don’t represent Islam in any way. They are terrorists. They plan attacks (with their primary target being the Hindus) but that doesn’t mean that in their attacks Muslims, Christians or Sikhs don’t die. They’re enemies of all Indians be it Hindus, Muslims or Sikhs. Therefore Mr Swamy’s claim that all Hindus need to get together to stop this is flawed. Everybody should get together to stop this, not just the Hindus. Certain fanatic Hindu right wing organizations target Muslims but that doesn’t mean they have to be tackled by only the Muslims. They have to be tackled by the entire nation including Hindus. Mr Swamy says that Indian Muslims were all being targeted by Militant Islamic Organizations with the intention of channelling them into becoming radicals but I don’t think that it means that all Muslims are terrorists. Right Wing Hindu Terrorist Organizations are trying to turn Hindus into radicals to get their support but that doesn’t turn all Hindus into terrorists. Similar thing applies to all Muslims as well.

Mr Swamy in his article wanted to suggest ways of tackling Islamic terrorism but his article fails to do that. He says that since Islamic terrorists want to turn India into an Islamic country, therefore the Hindus should turn it into a Hindu State meant for Hindus and for those whose ancestors were Hindus. He says that conversion from Hinduism should be banned in order to stop terrorists from converting people to Islam and from changing India’s demographics, he says that all those Non Hindus who don’t accept their Hindu ancestry should be stripped off their voting rights. Can anybody tell me how do these things help India in battling Islamic terrorism? Will converting India into a Hindu State by demolishing its secular character help in eradicating Islamic militants? Will making Non Hindus accept their Hindu Ancestry (Many of them don’t even have that) make a difference or what difference will it make in relation to Islamic terror if you strip Non Hindus of their voting rights if they don’t accept their Hindu ancestry? How can preventing people from conversion prevent bomb attacks? Mr Swamy is highly violent in his speech. He talks of bringing down 300 mosques as I mentioned earlier. How does this even tackle Islamic terror or address the problem of sleeper cells run by them? Since Right Wing Hindu Terrorists target mosques should Muslims also destroy 300 temples? Will this help in stopping Hindu terrorism? Mr Swamy says that if Pakistan doesn’t stop supporting militant groups in Pakistan from attacking India, India should actively start supporting liberation groups in Balochistan. If any country is using terrorism as its foreign policy which is hugely wrong, it doesn’t mean that we also act in the same reckless way. Mr Swamy argues that if Bangladeshi people illegally immigrate into India then India should invade Bangladesh and annex a part of it to accommodate Bangladeshi immigrants. This is another extremist take. Instead of searching for, identifying illegal immigrants and deporting them back, why should India go to war with Bangladesh? Some matters need to be resolved via dialogue. Mr Swamy seems to have lost touch with reality. He has been writing many fictitious and false articles about the Gandhi family and Sonia Gandhi in particular but this is way too much. I would like to tell Mr Swamy that hate hurts, harmony works. Kindly don’t base your ideology and agenda on vengeance and vendetta.

Mischief Played by Religious Leaders

Religious leaders are collectively responsible for making the society believe in the myth that their religion is the most superior religion in the whole world and nobody is capable of challenging their religion’s supremacy. They do so by utilizing the art of limited perception.

The Bible, Gita, Quran, Upanishads, Vedas, Guru Granth Sahib are not just books, they are huge books. These religious leaders pick out one line from these books and with the help of that one line they prove their superiority and other religion’s inferiority. Tell me how can one line be interpreted in a single way without studying its implications? Why was that statement made? Why was it written in such a way? Every religion has its set of drawbacks and strengths. Quoting one line out of these extremely huge Holy Books isn’t enough to prove a thing.

They do not accept alternating opinions and anybody who raises a voice against them is accused of blasphemy and things like that. If you ever attend a religious conference you will see that these people almost teach the same things. Never lie, don’t cheat, don’t harm anyone, respect everyone, help others and obey the Almighty. People appreciate them for saying so but frankly speaking there is nothing new in these words? We’ve been taught these things since time immemorial and it doesn’t take much time to repeat these things in an inspiring way after practicing a speech to perfection. I don’t have great fondness for religious leaders and that is why I believe in my own independent and pragmatic understanding of life and my religion.